There’s an increasing realisation that basically the dudes on those “pick-up artist“/”dating advice” websites are essentially creeps who are targeting vulnerable women for sex.

A lot of these guys are self-styled “nice guys” who evidently would like some sort of a medal for not raping their friends (because they’ve been FriendZoned) and feel super entitled to beautiful, intelligent, sexy women despite their own complete lack of looks, brain or personality. While of course being passed over for actually decent guys who are assertive, interesting and caring.

It was pretty much inevitable that the site “Nice guys of OkCupid” would appear- a Tumblr blog showcasing the “nice guy” bits of the profile as well as the “obviously an asshole” bits. Gold. Sadly, it’s been taken down, however “Fedoras of OkCupid“, which has an amazing amount of profiles in common is still around as is “Friendzoned again” which is probably the spiritual successor.

And then I saw this pile of trash. A “how-to” guide on finding vulnerable women, tricking them into dating you, then emotionally and sexually abusing them. It almost reads like a parody, it’s so bad! Creepy losers of the world, I thought you hid your evils a little better. My bad.

Related articles

I realise you don’t know me but I feel compelled to write. I’m a close friend of Chrys Stevenson and, because I follow Chrys’ writing, I’ve been aware of some of the furore that has erupted since your appearance on Q&A on Monday night (10 September, 2012).

In a previous incarnation, I was a fundamentalist Christian and pastor’s wife. That’s not the relatively bland statement it may appear. I, and my children, were profoundly damaged by Christianity and, some years after leaving, we are still recovering. In any case, I thought you might like to know how that particular Q&A program looked to someone like me.

I think of cults as being something beyond the religious definition. To quote Louis Jolyon West:

A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea or thing and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation from former friends and family, debilitation, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgment, promotion of total dependency on the group and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc.) designed to advance the goals of the group’s leaders to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community.

The use of cult techniques for furthering a business model is gaining traction. Apple and Fitness First are prime examples of this unethical behaviour which locks you into their ecosystem.

Interestingly, the methods used by cults are very similar or the same as techniques used by emotionally abusive partners. Certainly the indoctrination and inability to leave are hallmark behaviour. It’s probably of no surprise then that religious cults are rife with physical and sexual abuse. Corporate cults on the other hand do not seem to have that physical or sexual abuse problem, possibly due to strict policing and the fact that their business model (unlike that of a religion) has nothing to do with sex.

Other subcultures have clubs and communities that run in a cult like manner. More on that subject later.

I am aware that there are quite a few people for whom polyamory and open relationships work and is a valid lifestyle choice for them. They’re happy with each other and both/all partners are on the same level, not jealous and having fun. I know a few people here and there for whom it works. I’m genuinely happy for them and think the legal system should work in their interest etc.

Too common unfortunately appears to be people who use the terms “polyamory” or “open relationships” to mean “so I have this fall back plan partner who is there purely as a security blanket/to legitimise my life while I go and fuck around on the side”. Often in such situations, the partner who is out there getting laid or dating others has the bulk of the power in the relationship. Not uncommonly they are actually gay, have a fringe sexual fantasy they are playing out (and possibly dragging their partner into), don’t have the balls to break it off with a partner they’re no longer in love with or are insecure and this is the only way they feel confident enough to get casual sex or date. The other partner may not be really polyamorous (and only putting up with it because they love the person they’re with), they may also be in a similar boat to the other partner or the more powerful partner gets weird when they go and get some action.

Also terrible – stating that you are polyamorous in order to score someone you’re into when in reality you’re not and are actually trying to trick then.

This sort of thing is really uncool. Using someone else as a security blanket because you are cowardly or have unresolved issues is incredibly unfair to the person you’re with. It’s not real polyamory or open if you can’t deal with your partner enjoying the same advantages as you. If you don’t love someone anymore, you need to let them go so that you can both find someone else. Coercing others into situations they’re uncomfortable with is particularly uncool. And if in reality all you want is casual sex, well you can just have casual sex.

Then there is the assertion that because cheating is common that everyone is intrinsically polyamorous. I don’t even know where to start with that one.

A couple of people I know have come out of abusive relationships with their personality shattered. I don’t mean that they became more cynical or depressed or something simple like that. I mean that something intrinsic, something really fundamental and core to how they felt and seemed as people just changed, leaving them like hollow versions of their former selves. Or if not hollow, then unrecognisable. With elements of hidden hopelessness and cynicism and blasé distantness and an almost creepy weirdness.